APHC010334542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NOs: 6925 & 6927 of 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6925/2025 Between: Sravanam Jhansi ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. CHINTAPALLI SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6927/2025 Between: Sravanam Meenakshi ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. CHINTAPALLI SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 2 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: The Criminal Petition No.6925 of 2025 and Criminal Petition No.6927 of 2025 have been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the petitioner/accused No.3 and petitioner/accused No.1 respectively, for granting pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.148 of 2025 of Gopalapatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 318 (4) r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘the BNS’) and Section 21(1)(2)(3) of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (for short ‘the BUDS Act’) 2. These two Criminal Petition Nos.6925 of 2025 and 6927 of 2025 are heard and disposed of by way of this common order, as the petitioners in both petitions are accused in the same crime. 3. The case for the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 05.06.2025 at 17.00 hours, the complainant filed a report stating that he is resident of Simhadri Hills Apartment, Old Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam City. He is a retired Navy employee and is currently working as a civilian employee in the Navy. The complainant became acquainted with accused Nos.1 to 4, who reside in the same apartment. Prior to 05.06.2025, accused Nos.1 to 4 had been operating monthly chits, Sravanamasam chits, and Varalakshmi chits in their vicinity. Trusting their words, in June 2022, the complainant joined a Rs. 3 5 lakh chit and paid Rs.20,000 per month, totaling approximately Rs. 3,45,000/- from June 2022 to June 2024. Upon completion of the chit period, the accused were obligated to pay Rs.4,70,400/- to the complainant. When he requested to return of his money, they replied that if he had deposited the entire amount of Rs.4,70,400/-, they would have returned double the amount within a few months. However, after several months, they failed to return the money to him and his friends. Accused Nos.1 to 4 cheated the complainant and others in the name of chits. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. Mr.Chinthapalli Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 3 submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence; petitioners were falsely implicated by the police in the crime; petitioners are women; petitioners would abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to allow the petition. 6. Per contra, Sri Neelothpal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that investigation is not yet completed; if the petitioners are granted pre-arrest bail, they will interfere in the investigation, and it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 7. The allegation against the petitioner/accused No.3 is that she along with the other accused, collected amounts from the public while operating unauthorized chit schemes. The petitioner/accused No.3 along with her family 4 members, have filed I.P. No. 57 of 2024 before the Court of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam. 8. The petitioner/accused No. 3 in Crl.P. No. 6925 of 2025 has filed certain documents and submitted that she is aged about 26 years and is currently seven (7) months pregnant. 9. Considering the fact of the petitioner/accused No.3 pregnancy, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/accused No. 3 in Crl.P. No. 6925 of 2025. 10. The allegation against the petitioner/accused No. 1 in Crl.P. No. 6927 of 2025 is that she collected an amount of approximately Rs.66 lakhs from gullible public by falsely promising to repay the amount with a higher rate of interest. The police have registered a case for the alleged offences under Sections 318(4) r/w 3(5) of ‘the BNS, and Sections 21(1)(2)(3) of ‘the BUDS Act’. There are specific overt acts attributed against the petitioner/accused No.1 in Crl.P. No. 6927 of 2025. She is identified by the police as the main conspirator (linchpin) in the case. Therefore, this Court does not find it appropriate to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/accused No. 1 in Crl.P. No. 6927 of 2025. Grant of Anticipatory bail is not a license for the commission of an offence, nor it is a shield or protection for a person against whom specific allegations are leveled as per the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in 5 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab1 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner/accused No.1 in Crl.P.No.6927 of 2025, there are no merits for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/accused No.1. Hence, the criminal petition No.6927 of 2025 is liable to be dismissed. However, as per the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 in Crl.P.No.6927 of 2025, liberty is granted to the petitioner/accused No.1 to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned within ten (10) days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, and move an appropriate application before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned. The learned Jurisdictional Court concerned is directed to dispose of the said application in accordance with law, on its own merits by giving due and sufficient opportunity to the learned Public Prosecutor concerned, and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time, as far as possible preferably in two (02) days. 12. Considering the pregnancy of the petitioner/accused No.3, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crl.P.No.6925 of 2025 on bail with the following stringent conditions: a) In the event of arrest of the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crl.P.No.6925 of 2025 shall be enlarged on bail on executing a 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 2(2020) 5 SCC 1 6 personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; b) The petitioner/accused No.3 shall make herself available for investigation as and when required; c) The petitioner/accused No.3 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; 13. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition No.6925 of 2025 is allowed and the Criminal Petition No.6927 of 2025 is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 04.09.2025 S D P 7 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.6925 & 6927 of 2025 Date:04.09.2025 S D P